Key facts
- Jeremy Bamber's legal team is challenging a prison ban that prevents him from discussing his murder case with the media and supporters.
- The ban is being challenged through a judicial review claim against the secretary of state for justice and the prison governor.
- Lawyers argue the ban violates Bamber's right to free speech and obstructs his access to justice.
- The Prison Service cited protecting victims and maintaining confidence in the justice system as reasons for such restrictions.
- The challenge comes as new evidence has emerged suggesting Bamber's conviction may be unsafe, and his case is before the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Jeremy Bamber's legal team has initiated a judicial review against the secretary of state for justice and the governor of Wakefield prison, challenging a ban that prevents him from discussing his case with the media and long-term supporters. Bamber, who has served 41 years for the murders of five family members and maintains his innocence, argues the ban infringes on his right to free speech and access to justice.
The restrictions, implemented earlier this year, prevent Bamber from writing to and phoning journalists and his campaign team. While some communication has been eased, letters and emails discussing his case are not being forwarded, and phone contact remains prohibited. The Prison Service generally cites the need to protect victims and maintain confidence in the justice system for such measures, without providing specific reasons for Bamber's case.
Bamber was convicted of murdering his adoptive parents, stepsister Sheila Caffell, and her twin six-year-old sons. Initial reports suggested a murder-suicide by Caffell, but Bamber became a suspect after his former girlfriend, Julie Mugford, provided a statement. It later emerged Mugford had a deal to sell her story and potentially avoid charges in exchange for her testimony.
Media interest in Bamber's case has intensified recently, with a New Yorker podcast and a Guardian-commissioned forensic examination by Prof Jason Payne-James raising questions about his conviction. Prof Payne-James concluded a silencer, crucial to the trial's determination of guilt, was not used on Caffell. The prosecution had argued that the inability of Caffell to attach and replace the silencer herself was key to convicting Bamber.
Bamber's legal team, including Tim Owen KC, who was involved in a landmark 1999 ruling establishing prisoners' rights to contact the media, contends that these restrictions are particularly significant given Bamber's pending application before the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Lawyer Mark Newby stated the challenge raises serious questions about a prisoner's ability to communicate during a critical stage of their case.